CHRONIC PAIN / ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Noninferiority of ultrasound-guided lumbar disc block versus fluoroscopy-controlled lumbar discography for diagnosis of discogenic low back pain
More details
Hide details
1
Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
Submission date: 2025-01-21
Final revision date: 2025-02-19
Acceptance date: 2025-03-28
Publication date: 2025-07-07
Corresponding author
Liqiang Yang
Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical
University, No.45 Changchun St, Beijing, China
Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther 2025;57(1):148-156
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Evaluation of ultrasound (US)-guided disc block used to diagnose discogenic pain, as described in case reports. The study aimed to ascertain the noninferiority
of US-guided lumbar disc block to conventional discography in the diagnosis of discogenic low back pain (DLBP).
Material and methods:
The reports of 418 patients undergoing lumbar fusion for DLBP were stratified into a US group receiving US-guided lumbar disc block and a control group receiving fluoroscopy (FL)-assistant discography via a propensity-score matched method in
a 1 : 1 ratio. The primary endpoint was the confirmatory rate defined as the rate of clinical success following surgery measured by a numerical pain rating scale score ≤ 2 and
an Oswestry Disability Index score ≤ 15 at the 1-month follow-up point. Secondary
outcomes included needle insertions until contrast given, procedure time, radiation
dosages and adverse events.
Results:
The confirmatory rates for disc block and discography were 71.8% and 73.2%
(difference = –1.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: –9.9%, 7.2%, P = 0.353). The lower
bound of 95% CI did not cross the noninferiority margin of 10%. There were fewer
needle insertions (median 2, IQR: 1–3 vs. 5, IQR: 4–6, P < 0.001), shorter procedure
times (8.94 ± 2.28 vs. 16.13 ± 3.39 min, P < 0.001) and lower radiation dosage (1689.56
± 898.54 vs. 8293.50 ± 1039.09 μGy m2
, P < 0.001) in the US group than the control
group. No serious adverse events were observed.
Conclusions:
US-guided lumbar disc block was not inferior to conventional discography as a diagnostic modality in the evaluation of DLBP being considered for surgery.
Given that the sonographic method provided advantages in terms of facilitation of
needle insertion, reduced procedure time, and attenuated radiation exposure, it might
be an alternative option for surgery decision making.
REFERENCES (35)
1.
Knezevic NN, Candido KD, Vlaeyen J, Van Zundert J, Cohen SP. Low back pain. Lancet 2021; 398: 78-92. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00733-9.
2.
GBD 2021 Low Back Pain Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of low back pain, 1990-2020, its attributable risk factors, and projections to 2050: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. Lancet Rheumatol 2023; 5: e316-e329. DOI: 10.1016/S2665-9913(23)00098-X.
3.
Chen N, Fong D, Wong J. The global health and economic impact of low-back pain attributable to occupational ergonomic factors in the working-age population by age, sex, geography in 2019. Scand J Work Environ Health 2023; 49: 487-495. DOI: 10.5271/sjweh.4116.
4.
Mohd Isa IL, Lin Teoh S, Mohd Nor NH, Mokhtar SA. Discogenic low back pain: anatomy, pathophysiology and treatments of intervertebral disc degeneration. Int J Mol Sci 2022; 24: 208. DOI: 10.3390/ijms24010208.
5.
De Simone M, Choucha A, Ciaglia E, Conti V, Pecoraro G, Santurro A, et al. Discogenic low back pain: anatomic and pathophysiologic characterization, clinical evaluation, biomarkers, AI, and treatment options. J Clin Med 2024; 13: 5915. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13195915.
6.
Mummaneni PV, Dhall SS, Eck JC, Groff MW, Ghogawala Z, Watters WR, et al. Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 11: interbody techniques for lumbar fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 2014, 21: 67-74. DOI: 10.3171/2014.4.SPINE14276.
7.
Maharty DC, Hines SC, Brown RB. Chronic low back pain in adults: evaluation and management. Am Fam Physician 2024; 109: 233-244.
8.
Willems P. Decision making in surgical treatment of chronic low back pain: the performance of prognostic tests to select patients for lumbar spinal fusion. Acta Orthop Suppl 2013, 84: 1-35. DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2012.753565.
9.
Ohtori S, Kinoshita T, Yamashita M, Inoue G, Yamauchi K, Koshi T, et al. Results of surgery for discogenic low back pain: a randomized study using discography versus discoblock for diagnosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009; 34: 1345-1348. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a401bf.
10.
Wang G, Zhang Z, Liu J, Cheng L. Comparison of the effect of diagnosing discogenic low back pain by sinuvertebral nerve block versus discoblock a retrospective cohort study. Eur Spine J 2023; 32: 2093-2100. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-023-07732-2.
11.
Migliore A, Sorbino A, Bacciu S, Bellelli A, Frediani B, Tormenta S, et al. The technique of intradiscal injection: a narrative review. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2020; 16: 953-968. DOI: 10.2147/TCRM.S251495.
12.
Wu TJ, Hung CY, Lee CW, Lam S, Clark TB, Chang KV. Ultrasound-guided lumbar intradiscal injection for discogenic pain: technical innovation and presentation of two cases. J Pain Res 2020; 13: 1103-1107. DOI: 10.2147/JPR.S253047.
13.
Lam K, Hung CY, Wu TJ: Ultrasound-guided L5/S1 intradiscal needle placement using biplanar approach with the patient in the lateral decubitus position: A report of three cases. Pain Pract 2022, 22:117-122.
14.
Masuda K, Shigematsu H, Maeda M, Okuda A, Tanaka Y. Ultrasound-guided disc pain induction test for diagnosis of discogenic lumbar pain: a cross-sectional study. J Orthop Surg Res 2023; 18: 847. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04327-x.
15.
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg 2014; 12: 1495-1499. DOI: 10.1016/ j.ijsu.2014.07.013.
16.
Farrar JT, Young JJ, LaMoreaux L, Werth JL, Poole MR. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain 2001; 94: 149-158. DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00349-9.
17.
Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000; 25: 2940-2952. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017.
18.
DePalma MJ, Lee JE, Peterson L, Wolfer L, Ketchum JM, Derby R. Are outer annular fissures stimulated during diskography the source of diskogenic low-back pain? An analysis of analgesic diskography data. Pain Med 2009; 10: 488-494. DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4637. 2009.00602.x.
19.
Peng B, Fu X, Pang X, Li D, Liu W, Gao C, Yang H. Prospective clinical study on natural history of discogenic low back pain at 4 years of follow-up. Pain Physician 2012; 15: 525-532.
20.
Carragee EJ, Alamin TF, Miller J, Grafe M. Provocative discography in volunteer subjects with mild persistent low back pain. Spine J 2002, 2: 25-34. DOI: 10.1016/s1529-9430(01)00152-8.
21.
Choucha A, Travaglini F, De Simone M, Evin M, Farah K, Fuentes S. The Da Vinci Robot, a promising yet underused minimally invasive tool for spine surgery: a scoping review of its current role and limits. Neurochirurgie 2024; 71: 101624. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuchi.2024.101624.
22.
Kim JH, van Rijn RM, van Tulder MW, Koes BW, de Boer MR, Ginai AZ, Ostelo R, van der Windt D, Verhagen AP. Diagnostic accuracy of diagnostic imaging for lumbar disc herniation in adults with low back pain or sciatica is unknown; a systematic review. Chiropr Man Therap 2018; 26: 37. DOI: 10.1186/s12998-018-0207-x.
23.
Gruver C, Guthmiller KB. Provocative Discography. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025.
24.
Kim D, Wadley R. Variability in techniques and patient safety protocols in discography: a national multispecialty survey of International Spine Intervention Society members. J Spinal Disord Tech 2010; 23: 431-438. DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e3181b6444f.
25.
Nisolle JF, Neveu F, Hontoir F, Clegg P, Kirschvink N, Vandeweerd JM. CT-guided injection technique into intervertebral discs in the ovine lumbar spine. Eur Spine J 2013; 22: 2760-2765. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-013-2936-9.
26.
Horton WC, Daftari TK. Which disc as visualized by magnetic resonance imaging is actually a source of pain? A correlation between magnetic resonance imaging and discography. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1992; 17: S164-S171. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199206001-00018.
27.
Dietrich CF, Bamber J, Berzigotti A, Bota S, Cantisani V, Castera L, et al. EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations on the Clinical Use of Liver Ultrasound Elastography, Update 2017 (Long Version). Ultraschall Med 2017; 38: e16-e47. DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-103952.
28.
Urasaki T, Muro T, Ito S, Hattori Y, Ozaki S. Consistency of lumbar discograms of the same disc obtained twice at a 2-week interval: influence of needle tip position. J Orthop Sci 1998; 3: 243-251. DOI: 10.1007/s007760050049.
29.
Huang TS, Zucherman JF, Hsu KY, Shapiro M, Lentz D, Gartland J. Gadopentetate dimeglumine as an intradiscal contrast agent. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002; 27: 839-843. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200204150- 00011.
30.
Cohnen M, Poll LJ, Puettmann C, Ewen K, Saleh A, Modder U. Effective doses in standard protocols for multi-slice CT scanning. Eur Radiol 2003; 13: 1148-1153. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-002-1614-9.
31.
Wang D. Image guidance technologies for interventional pain procedures: ultrasound, fluoroscopy, and CT. Curr Pain Headache Rep 2018; 22: 6. DOI: 10.1007/s11916-018-0660-1.
32.
Stretanski MF, Vu L. Fluoroscopy Discography Assessment, Protocols, and Interpretation. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024.
33.
Willems PC, Jacobs W, Duinkerke ES, De Kleuver M. Lumbar discography: should we use prophylactic antibiotics? A study of 435 consecutive discograms and a systematic review of the literature. J Spinal Disord Tech 2004; 17: 243-247. DOI: 10.1097/00024720-200406000-00013.
34.
Chen Y, Gao Z. Progress in discography. Spine Surg Relat Res 2023; 7: 129-135. DOI: 10.22603/ssrr.2022-0193.
35.
Tallroth K, Soini J, Antti-Poika I, Konttinen YT, Honkanen V, Yrjo-nen T. Premedication and short term complications in iohexol discography. Ann Chir Gynaecol 1991; 80: 49-53.